#COVID19: A fork in the road

from Enough 14

The COVID-19 pandemic is bringing us to a fork in the road. On one side we see the near future that power wants: an atomized and remote workforce, a drastic decrease in spontaneous in-person social life, a big increase in who is considered surplus population as “non-essential” work is cancelled, and a bunch more surveillance, policing, and social control. On the other hand, the state is scared, it’s showing that government is capable of providing social security when the choice is between that and an uncontrolled breakdown in the social order. Neither of these paths lead to places that we, as anarchists, can feel good about. As this pandemic runs its course and society changes because of it, a new normal will slowly congeal as things cool down. What that normal looks like and how it comes about is still up in the air.

Originally published in Anathema, Volume 6 Issue 3, March/April 2020. Anathema is an anarchist periodical from Philadelphia.

In the name of “public health” all sort of security measures are coming together to create an authoritarian wet dream. Internationally borders are becoming more difficult to cross, and anti-immigrant and specifically anti-Asian sentiment is on the rise as racists in the media and politics stir up fear hostility toward China. Earlier in the month video surfaced of an Asian couple being beaten by a group of people on a SEPTA platform, and Philly isn’t the only place seeing this sort of harassment, New York and Los Angeles have also experienced similar attacks. The state is encouraging what is being called “social distancing”. People are advised to stay home, cut down on social outings and gatherings, stay six feet apart, and digitize or give up on in-person social life. Schools and universities are closing left and right. At least one school is taking it even further, the University of Pennsylvania sent an email to its students March 14 explaining that social distancing is encouraged and that students “congregating on campus, or off campus, will face immediate intervention by Penn Police.” It would not be surprising to see other institutions or even the city itself take on similarly drastic measures. The Board of Health has made forcing people to quarantine legal. Many workplaces are asking their workers to work from home, reducing their hours, or laying them off. Workers that are considered non-essential are falling through the cracks financially. What we see forming is a way of life that is sterile, policed, mediated, and closed off. When this pandemic tapers off, who’s to say that bosses, cops, and politicians won’t like the peace and quiet enough to keep using all these new ways of controlling the population? Once those in power have the means and the compliance of the population, how easy would it be for them to simply keep the ball rolling? Is what we’re seeing as a crisis response a glimpse into the new “normal” we’ll live after the crisis?

At the same time, power is scared. The state and capitalists have made some proposals and offers that would have seemed outrageous a few months ago. Comcast is offering free access to its internet networks to the poor, offering unlimited data, and has put a hold on shutting off connections. Verizon is making a similar offer. PECO, PGW, and Philadelphia Water Department have all pledged to not disconnect utilities even if they are owed money (for the time being). A resolution has passed that prevents utility shutoffs and also places a moratorium on evictions, foreclosures, and tax-lien sales until the pandemic clears. This means that the issue of losing ones housing during the crisis could be less likely if your landlord doesn’t decide to lock you out illegally (although rent and tax debt will continue to drain our wallets). Federally the state is expanding who qualifies for unemployment, and figuring out how to send $1200 to millions of US citizens. These offers and proposals go to show that the means of existence — shelter, warmth, water, and communication — could be provided to everyone by the state and capital. Of course these kinds of actions by the state are unlikely to last, the aversion of US politicians to anything that remotely resembles consideration for social well-being is derided as socialism or communism. Either way the services and infrastructure to take care of each other and our needs exist and outside a capitalist economy could be much more accessible than our current setup. With that in mind why would or should we entrust our health and social life to the institutions that could, but do not and never will, meet our needs? This pandemic only makes more clear the absurd priorities of the state and capitalists. In the unlikely event that the state and capitalists decided to adopt a welfare state model we still have no guarantees that this wouldn’t be coupled with intense policing and isolation, that it would last, or would include those who are most oppressed.

There is a third way: resisting the isolation and policing, and also sidestepping a social safety net that could be pulled out from beneath us as soon as we’re well enough to work and pay, we can take responsibility for ourselves and self-organize. As we lose our hours or jobs we are still expected to pay to live, to eat, to move about the city. As we worry for our individual and collective health, we can figure out how to meet our needs outside the systems that would rather see us sick and alone. Schools, offices, stores, and many other places are sitting empty. Can we imagine open-sourcing test kits and occupying labs to make them readily available? People are already organizing rent strikes and opening up squats to make life without work go from a crisis imposed disaster to a joyful freeing of our time and space? When food and health care supplies are in short supply, will we have squatted gardens and autonomous clinics to meet our needs?* Will the local pharmacy continue to profit off our fears and desire to take care of ourselves, or will it be taken over to provide medicine, snacks, and hygiene supplies to whoever needs? Will we take advantage of the crisis to leave the city to start a farm or food forest on some under-policed plot of land? This pandemic is making power’s disdain for free and healthy life more than clear. Will we respond by folding into ourselves, losing ourselves behind glowing blue screens and locked doors or will we make our lives our own and create the health and freedom we need to life in the midst of crisis?

*Since this article was written at least one autonomous garden has been squatted 🙂

Read the full Anathema, Volume 6 Issue 3, March/April 2020 (PDF file)

Anathema Volume 6 Issue 3

from Anathema

Volume 6 Issue 3 (PDF for reading 8.5 x 11)
Online only this issue ????????

In this issue:

  • From Future To Present Tense
  • COVID-19: A Fork In The Road
  • What Went Down
  • Earth’s Destruction Deemed “Essential”
  • Black Socialists In America Approached By The FBI
  • COVID In Prisons
  • The Last Assembly: A Report Back
  • Mutual Aid Toward Freedom

COVID19 AND THE PA DOC

from Dreaming Freedom | Practicing Abolition

From: Wilson, Stephen

Date Received: 03/12/2020 06:22 PM

Subject: COVID19 AND THE PA DOC

For the past two days, the PA DOC has finally thinking about the coronavirus and how to protect prisoners from it. Only over the past two days! Announcements have been played over the prison television station reminding prisoners to wash our hands frequently and cover our coughs. The usual mandatory co-payment for medical services has been suspended for those with flu-like symptoms. A post up relating what COVID19 is and how it is contracted is circulating too. Lastly, the monthly van and bus visits have been cancelled. We are anticipating a possible lockdown too.

But here’s the thing. We, prisoners, are already quarantined. The only way we will contract the virus is if one of the employees of the PA DOC brings it inside. We have repeatedly stated this to staff. All these precautions they put in place are to keep prisoners from spreading the virus to one another. What are they doing about the only avenue for the virus to get inside? What are they doing to insure their staff don’t infect us? Because if the virus gets inside, we are done. When anyone on the block gets a cold, almost half the block ends up with it. We are crammed together in cells, on blocks and in rooms. Our ventilation system is the worst.

What is more ironic is how here, at SCI-Fayette, prisoners are not given adequate time to clean their living space. Once a week, 32 cells are given 15 minutes to clean their entire cell. The prisoners must share 1 mop, 2 brooms, 2 spray bottles and one toilet brush. 15 minutes! How are we expected to keep clean living spaces with with less that 30 seconds a piece to clean up? It makes me wonder how concerned is the DOC about our health. Moreover, we are prohibited from possessing any cleaning materials or supplies. And now there’s COVID19.

The PA DOC has to put on a show of concern for prisoners’ health. If there were truly concerned, they would allow us to clean ourselves and our living spaces thoroughly. If they were truly concern, they wouldn’t make prisoners choose between hygiene products and a co payment for medical services. A prisoner must work 40 hours to cover the cost of a sick call visit and a prescription for ibuprofen. If they were truly concerned about our health, we wouldn’t be housed next to over 400 acres of coal ash dust. But as usual, when disaster strikes, prisoners are an afterthought.

I hope that people understand how vulnerable prisoners are in situations like this one. We need people to advocate for responsible health services for all prisoners, even when there is no pandemic. .

In Struggle,

Stevie

Anathema Volume 5 Issue 2

from Anathema

Volume 6 Issue 2 (PDF for reading 8.5 x 11)

Volume 6 Issue 2 (PDF for printing 11 x 17)

In this issue:

  • Military And Industry
  • What Went Down
  • End Of Economic Growth
  • Interview With Gay Chaos
  • Civilization and Its Epidemics
  • Solidarity With The Wet’suwet’en
  • Anarchism Means Flying Forever
  • Greek Anarchists Arrested
  • Turkeys Against Cops
  • Limits Of Resistance Promise Of Revolt
  • Classifieds
  • Song Of The Worms

Friendly Fire Collective’s Dissolution Reflections

from Friendly Fire

Screen Shot 2018-07-21 at 9.35.12 AM

Collective Statement

Friendly Fire Collective was always an experiment – always changing, re-forming. As a national collective, we formed around a potential zine for anarchist Quakers, and after that fell through, a potential retreat for Quaker anarchists. Over time, that retreat vision changed, hoping to connect revolutionary leftist Christians or, more generally, “mystics”. 30 or so of us gathered in May 2018 in Philadelphia. As a local group in Philadelphia, we formed after the Friendly Fire retreat among friends and comrades as a prayer group. We met weekly to eat, pray, and sing. It was a way to support and encourage one another. We endeavored to be in solidarity (both materially and spiritually) with the revolutionary left, leading us to participate in and support Occupy ICE and the National Prison Strike, as well as create propaganda to push people of faith to realize the need for revolution.

Over time, though, our expectations and visions came into conflict, as we continually failed to have a clear understanding of our mission, or a sense of our structure. In the space of indecision, unspoken disagreements and interpersonal conflict led to the end of our affinity group. A way forward together as a community feels not only impossible, but unnecessary. Instead of spiritual community, it is more important in these times to orient our lives around the work of liberation. For some of us, what we sought in Friendly Fire was what we wanted in a political formation, or a party. But that was not what we were, or were intended to be.

There are several things to be owned and learned. The church abolitionist rhetoric, grounded in “Quaker” apocalyptic idealism, was ultimately ultra-leftist. Though we did not officially take this stance, the majority of us supported it to some degree, despite knowing that this was a stance that the masses would not be able to adopt any time soon. Church abolitionism combats an institution that can often play an antagonistic role on these stolen lands, but also plays a vital, unharmful role, especially in the lives of many colonized people, even at times serving the people and inspiring class consciousness. Christians have played roles in revolutions throughout the world, even communities of Christians, such as with the community of peasants in Solentiname led by Father Ernesto Cardenal in revolutionary Nicaragua. There is value to finding the revolutionary potentiality in the Christian narrative, as it is a fair analysis that Jesus was a revolutionary leader.

We also found our orientation becoming church-like, despite our church abolitionism. Our stressing of discipleship and fellowship led us away from the work of building revolution. Within a few months of forming, we fell out of coalition work around Abolish ICE and ceased to plan and collaborate with other orgs on actions. At our best, as an affinity group, we were a presence of care and faith in the revolutionary left. At our worst, we were an insular intentional community.

We must own the role whiteness played in our collective. As we had articulated a number of times in our analysis of liberal unprogrammed Quakerism – whiteness has a tendency of becoming the authority in horizontal, white-majority organizations – the same could be said about our organization, even as we sought to be accomplices and race traitors. What started out as a POC-majority organization became a majority white within months, and the difference was felt. Several attendees noted that our meetings began to feel uncomfortable for a number of reasons, including our conversations becoming inaccessible and our members unfriendly. These issues were discussed between members, but never addressed or properly dealt with. We consistently catered and accommodated to the needs and comfort of our petit-bourgeois white members over the needs of colonized and working class people attending, making our space uninhabitable to many and our vision incoherent. We heed to the wisdom of Loreno Kom’boa Ervin:

“Even so, it is important for anti-racist/anti-colonial activists to continue trying to dismantle racism inside these movements or organizations, and failing that, to dismantle the groups themselves entirely. If allowed to continue, they do more harm than good. Activists must recognize the damage of internal racism, the politics which support it, and how to deal with it, and then act swiftly and forcefully, sometimes even ruthlessly.”

As we formally dissolve our collective, we all encourage those seeking to be faithful to God’s liberatory Spirit to join a revolutionary organization. The u.$.a. cannot be reformed into justice, but rather must be abolished. We will not wage revolution through Marxist happy hours or electing a “socialist” war criminal. Do not give into electoralism and reformism. Revolution is the only solution!

Guard yourselves against liberalism, which Comrade Mao defines as stemming from petty-bourgeois selfishness, placing “personal interests first and the interests of the revolution second, [giving rise to] ideological, political and organizational liberalism.” Orient your life around the work of liberation.

Guard yourselves against white chauvinism. Make your organization accountable to colonized communities. If your organization refuses, seek its destruction. Support colonized revolutionaries and their organizations. There are many good reasons why there are formations of colonized people that refuse to work with white communists. Humbly reflect on that, continually. Read Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin’s The Progressive Plantation and J. Sakai’s Settlers.

Be disciplined. Read and discuss revolutionary texts with comrades. Study revolution to build revolution. Learn to self-crit. Exercise. Get comfortable with a gun. We only have each other, so we must be prepared to care for and defend our communities.

Serve the people. Live with the people. Learn from the people. Remember Comrade Mao’s words: “The masses are the real heroes, while we ourselves are often childish and ignorant, and without this understanding, it is impossible to acquire even the most rudimentary knowledge.”

Listen to the people’s concerns and needs. Organize around them. See what works. Own your mistakes, and do better. Love the people, and care for their well being. Be humble and kind. With the people, communists seek to build new power, and build towards completely overthrowing imperial power. This is an overwhelming but necessary task – and we must love and support one another to do it. Take care of your comrades.

As we look back on the last couple years we feel a mix of deep sadness, but at the same time we feel an excitement and creative energy burning within us. This spirit, we know, is the spirit of Liberation which burns down in order to build up and breaks in order to bind. Friendly Fire may be coming to its end, but we know that this same Holy Spirit is working within the masses to make a way in the desert for the true kindom of G-d which will tear down every wall, burn down every prison, and break every chain. The work of revolution is only beginning. Amen.

Anathema Volume 6 Issue 1

from Anathema

Volume 6 Issue 1 (PDF for reading 8.5×11)

Volume 6 Issue 1 (PDF for printing 11×17)

In this issue:

  • Philadelphia Energy Sale
  • 2019 Year In Review
  • Attorney General Denies Parole
  • What Went Down
  • Response To Response To “Property Destruction Is Not Enough”
  • 2020 Summits
  • Bern It Down!
  • BlackRock
  • World News

“They Try to Pit Everybody Against Everybody”: Interview with a Member of the Student Labor Action Project

from It’s Going Down

Interview from the Radical Education Department about the Student Labor Action Project (SLAP) in Philadelphia.

By Ivanna Berrios and Jason Koslowski

The 2019-2020 academic year is in full swing. And that means it’s time to think seriously about how we’ll build up radical campus struggles this year.

The following is Part 4 of the Campus Power Project, a series of interviews and writings about building radical, bottom-up class power on and across college campuses. For Part 1, see this; for Part 2, see this; for Part 3, see this.

INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERVIEW

In this interview, I spoke with Ivanna Berrios, a sophomore as well as an organizer with the Student Labor Action Project (SLAP) at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia

SLAP is an organization that aims to build student-worker power “for the transformation of our community and material conditions to create a better reality” at Penn.

Ivanna explores key issues like:

  • Ways to build radical solidarity between students and other kinds of campus workers
  • Ways of grappling with retention, since many students leave for the summer and some of the most seasoned organizers graduate after a few years
  • The tactics that college admins use to divide organizers against each other
  • And SLAP’s unique answer to the dilemma of university funding

Since this interview during the spring semester last academic year SLAP has continued to develop, with changes in leadership and a focus on researching the working and learning conditions on campus. But the piece offers a snapshot of that ongoing development and SLAP’s efforts to develop student-worker power on campus.

JK: The Student Labor Action Project, or SLAP, has a longer history at Penn. Where did this most recent revival come from? What issue sparked it?

IB: SLAP has been officially on Penn’s campus since 1999. And they’ve done a lot of really great things in the past. They helped the dining hall workers gain a union—that’d be Teamsters 929—and also really involved in the campaign calling for Penn to pay PILOT [payment in lieu of taxes]].

In the past couple of years, it was mainly spearheaded by upperclassman, so when those upperclassmen graduated, SLAP membership kind of atrophied. It never really disbanded officially, it just had different waves of resurgence.

And the most recent wave that I’ve been involved in really started a couple of months ago in February, because the director of Penn Dining stopped permitting the celebration of Black History Month. This was in response to controversy at U Chicago and other campuses, where the celebrations were considered stereotypical. That was their claimed reasons for not allowing the campus workers to celebrate, even though the workers themselves said that they did want to do things for Black History Month.

One of our core members of SLAP, Michelle, is very very close friends with some of the dining hall workers. She was hearing their grievances, so we organized a direct action on campus just to show solidarity to say that we saw how Penn Dining was disrespecting the wishes of the dining hall workers.

That was back in February, but that wasn’t officially SLAP. We did a rally on campus where the dining hall workers spoke about how Black History Month is important to them, and how they were upset that Penn wasn’t allowing them to celebrate it or acknowledge it. And that basically kick-started a conversation about how Penn doesn’t listen to the dining hall workers in general, about their disrespect in the workplace. We started learning more about subcontracted labor. Penn subcontracts through Bon Appetit for certain dining halls, and the Bon Appetit workers are not technically Penn employees. And those workers are underpaid. They’re disrespected. They don’t get health benefits and education benefits. And then we connected to Villanova USAS, United Students Against Sweatshops. They really helped us a lot in providing a blueprint for how to restart an organization. We had organizing workshops and we did flyering and outreach.

So the most recent resurgence of SLAP had was catalyzed by the Black History Month event, and then it was Villanova USAS that fanned the flames, and we became an independent collective of students who were trying to continue SLAP’s legacy of working in tandem with the workers.

JK: What do you see as SLAP’s basic goals, both short-term and long-term?

IB: This semester we’ve been focusing on relationship-building, direct actions, and education. A lot of students on campus don’t realize that [campus] workers are being exploited to the extent that they are. So it’s been a lot of flyering, a lot of getting direct quotes and numbers from the dining hall workers. That’s our plan for now for the summer, research and building a base of people who support us.

Next semester [in fall 2019], we’re hoping to launch a direct campaign of antagonizing the administration, to get Penn to apply pressure to Bon Appetit. Because Bon Appetit is headquartered in California, so it’s really hard to apply pressure directly. Among our long term goals is to end all subcontracted labor on campus. It’s not just Bon Appetit, Bon Appetit is just what we focused on. But there are other subcontracted workers, and they’re also facing similar issues: they don’t receive the same benefits that direct Penn employees do. And we also talked about eventually having a living wage campaign so that every worker on campus would have a living wage, including grad students, including cleaning services. A long term goal is definitely to branch out into all types of workers on campus.

JK: Sometimes it seems as though there’s a tendency for campus struggles to focus mostly, or only, on direct actions like sit-ins. But SLAP is taking a more careful and long-term approach. Why focus on the slower base-building instead of focusing mostly on flashier tactics like a sit-in?

IB: Because we were working in tandem with the workers. We always want to consider what they want and what they feel comfortable with and the timeline they foresee. Right now, if we were to escalate without having a base, and just go out and have our small group of people who really believe in the cause, then there really would be a chance of backlash on the workers.

And it’s because our goals are so long term, so big. Eventually we want to end all subcontracted labor. We’re trying to see how we can build to that, and not just assume we can get that off the bat. Because it is a little unrealistic to think that we could just show up to the president’s office and demand that they end subcontracted labor.

I remember talking to a former slap member, Devon. She said, “Don’t launch a campaign unless you know you’ll have a good probability of winning.” That really stuck with me.

JK: So do you think it’s important to organize mostly around one particular campaign on a campus?

IB: Well, a problem that has faced SLAP in the past is that it has always been very it’s been very specifically campaign-oriented like other campus groups. It’s been its strength in that it always has a forward-thinking vision and there’s always the next thing to move on to. But it also means that once a campaign is over, regardless of success, the group will lose its audience after the campaign, because that was what was driving the whole group.

So we’re trying to make sure that that doesn’t happen to us, by having campaign after campaign rather than just one long enduring campaign. We want to make sure that it’s a succession, so that people don’t lose the group once the first campaign ends like they have in the past.

JK: The SLAP revival came through a member’s connection to the dining hall workers. How did your comrade make that connection? It can be tough on a campus to connect students and campus staff, since they’re (intentionally, it seems) kept so isolated from each other.

IB: Actually, the relationship was very organic. This member’s name is Michelle and she is a senior right now. So she’s had a lot of time to get to know the dining hall workers. And she’s also very outgoing and very friendly. She just happened to frequent one of the dining halls that subcontracted workers—Hillel—a good amount. And then through that she befriended the dining hall workers. And it’s funny enough, a lot of students don’t know a lot about the conditions of the workers, though a lot of students do form those organic relationships, just because, especially as freshmen, they see the dining workers every day, and they ask “Hi, how are you?” I wouldn’t say the majority 04:04 of students do that, because a lot of students at Penn can be very elitist and dehumanizing, and just see them as invisible sources of labor that can feed them. But there are definitely another group of people.

What differentiated Michelle was that she is very politically radical. Um, and I would say most of Core is. And so through those organic conversations— “Hi, how was your day”—it would come up: “Oh, this is happening.” One of the dining hall workers’ son was shot by police. He’s OK now, he had to go through a lot of physical therapy. But it was a really large financial strain on the family, and Michelle started a Go Fund Me to raise money, not necessarily from an organizing standpoint.

Something SLAP has really been trying to work on is building those relationships, so that we don’t have just one point person who’s friends with the dining hall workers while the rest of us don’t really know them. So we’ve been pairing up core members with dining hall workers, having them text them, reminding them about events to come out to, reminding them about meetings. We had a pot luck recently which some of the dining hall workers came to. It wasn’t even a structured meeting, we just all brought food and hung out. We’re just trying to build up those relationships.

Actually, though, that dining hall worker had been involved with SLAP for a long time. He’s a big leader among the dining hall workers at Hillel. And so he goes to all our meetings, or most of our meetings and he knows former SLAP members, and he’s familiar with Teamsters 929, and so just being friends with him really opened the door for us.

JK: I know this was an organic, almost accidental connection with the dining hall workers. But I also see a method coming out of this connection: finding ways to help break break down the walls of separation between students and campus workers, in more informal ways (everyday conversation, potlucks) and more formal ways (shared meetings). And then helping develop those relationships in more political directions.

IB: Yeah, that was really important for us. There’s a power imbalance between the students and the workers, and we didn’t want it to say, “We are the Student Labor Action Project, we have come to save you!” and have the workers say, “Who the fuck are you?” So we really tried to focus on building those relationships,

It is a friendship, but it’s also a politicized friendship. Because we really needed them to trust us for them to tell us the details of what was happening in their working conditions. I don’t think we could’ve done that without that organic process. I think it was founded upon just seeing the humanity and not necessarily seeing them as political subjects that we have to radicalize. That I think can sometimes be a perspective that some organizers and leftists take, and it comes from a good place, but it can be dehumanizing.

We first built those relationships with the dining hall worker, who like I said is a natural leader, and with a shop steward, and they tell the other workers. So there’s also that other element, where they trust us because they trust their fellow workers and those workers trust us. Because we can’t get to every worker, realistically. But we can get to the leaders in the workplaces who other co-workers trust.

JK: One of the major tactics that admins use against campus organizers is to pit different kinds of campus workers against each other: students against campus staff, staff with more benefits against staff with less benefits, and so on. Can you say how SLAP is trying to bridge gaps between those kinds of workers?

IB: Yeah, they’ve even been trying to pit students against students. We were recently in a meeting with Pam, the director of dining hall operations at Penn, as well as one person from the united minority students council, one person from Lambda, which is the umbrella LGBTQ group, one person from the umbrella African American students’ group, and one person from the Latina coalition. The meeting was in regards to the Black History Month event. We spoke to the people from the other student groups before the meeting, luckily. And we were able to see that most of them were on our side.

Pam didn’t want to talk about labor, she wanted to talk about diversity, and how they could be more culturally sensitive in the future. And every time SLAP would bring up the general disrespect of the admin towards the workers, she would say, “Oh, I think you need to stop derailing the meeting. Let’s see what [the other student representatives] think.” And they were like, “We support them!” Basically, the admins are trying to pit our group, the radical wing, against the more moderate, “reasonable” student body representatives, and it didn’t work, luckily. Because we had spoken to them and had them on our side first. They try to pit everybody against everybody, in any possible way, just to make sure we’re not talking to each other and not antagonizing them.

JK: That highlights how crucial it is for organizers to be reaching out and connecting to different kinds of student groups before confronting the bosses, so that admins can’t weaponize the idea of “diversity” against campus workers.

IB: The administration will use it as a weapon against grievances in general. Because after the meeting, then, they can say, “Oh, we met with students, we got their insight,” even if students didn’t necessarily walk away from the meeting feeling listened to or felt like we made any progress. And that’s definitely been a trend in the past. Someone actually brought that up in the meeting. Someone from the Lambda Alliance brought that up as a concern, saying “I just want to make sure you [admins] don’t release a statement saying that you met with us and listened to our concerns. Because I don’t feel like we’re being listened to.”

JK: What’s been the most effective tactic for building up SLAP so far, for getting more people in?

IB: I think the most successful has been our worker/student meetings, where um the workers come to meetings and we talk about their conditions and talk about what they want changed. And I think those have been the most successful in getting people invested. Afterwards we try to follow up with people, especially new people after the meetings. For the most part, those meetings have been the ones where people say, “I didn’t realize the extent of the exploitation, and hearing it directly from the workers was really, it really changed things for me, and I really want to get involved.” We’re not trying to slip into a purely emotional plea. It’s more that, when you see the anger of the workers and the frustrations of the workers, and you see them face to face, and you ask them questions, and you learn more personally, it makes you feel a lot more connected to the struggle, not just seeing it on paper. I think that has been the most successful at broadening our base.

JK: Can you say a word about the problem of student retention? One of the things I’ve run into organizing on campuses is that students go away for the summer, and some of the most experienced people graduate each year. What are ways to deal with this issue?

IB: That’s the biggest pitfalls to organizing. It’s cyclical. And it’s just so hard to keep people. What we’ve been trying to do is make a lot of spreadsheets to keep information on people. I mean that sounds creepy, but we’re really trying to make sure we don’t lose people. So we’ve been keeping track of who’s going to stay over the summer, we’re focusing on them. we’ve been keeping track of freshmen and sophomores, and we’ve been focusing on them for the one on ones and the follow up texts.

And we also try to build connections among the students themselves, because a lot of times, a lot of groups on campus can feel really pre-professional or depersonalized or can feel you’re only in it to add to your resume. So we had a potluck just yesterday where we all just hang out. And we try to just hang out and be friends and keep ourselves accountable to each other in that way. Especially core [members]. We weren’t even friends before but now we’re all tight. We would almost force it at the beginning: we’d be like, “OK, we have to build community, let’s hang out.” So we’ve just been trying to make sure that people feel invested because there are hundreds of student groups you could join and people are always juggling them.

JK: And I would think that because of this issue of retention, it’s especially important to build long-lasting relationships with campus staff workers who live in Philly, since they’re going to be longer term than a four year student, and they are around in the summers, too.

IB: Yeah. That dining hall worker I mentioned has been an important and a really great resource. And like he’s been a great resource because he was involved with SLAP earlier and then when all the momentum from SLAP graduated, he was still there. And so when this new resurgence of SLAP happened, he was there to help us out, using his past experience of working with the students.

JK: Another issue for campus organizers is funding. Groups face a dilemma. They can be officially recognized, and so get funding from the college—but that comes with faculty oversight and can blunt a struggle’s more radical edge. Or they can refuse to be recognized, but give up college funding, which could have helped a group grow and develop. How has SLAP navigated the problem of funding?

IB: We’re acknolwdged by the university—-but we’re different from other student groups, in that we don’t get funding from the university. So we don’t necessarily have faculty advisers.

We don’t want to be tied up with that type of bureaucracy. But at the same time we do indirectly receive money, just because some groups really support our message. They’ll get funding and give to us, kind of secretly. They’ll get funding to buy food for an “event” they’re having, but the event they’re having is to have us. So we’re not necessarily “clean” from university money but we are trying to avoid those those complications.

What happened after word spread that the Proud Boys did karaoke in a West Philly bar

from Mainstream Media

What happened after word spread that the Proud Boys did karaoke in a West Philly bar

So a group of people armed with Proud Boys swag walk into a West Philly bar.

Among the string of events that happened next: a boycott, a meltdown in online review sections, an interview on conservative talk radio, a projectile through a window, a complaint about Antifa, and a karaoke master who says he’ll never return.

It’s been a long couple of weeks for the Millcreek Tavern.

The West Philadelphia dive bar has been under fire and called a haven for hate by both longtime patrons and people who have never set foot in the place since Nov. 15. That’s when a group maybe affiliated with the Proud Boys, a far-right organization designated as a hate group, showed up for the weekly karaoke night and left their branded materials — including a mouse pad and fliers — lying around.

It wasn’t the first time the Millcreek Tavern and its owner, Jack Gillespie, have made headlines. In 2017, the bar was in the news for apparently booking a metal band known for its anti-Semitic lyrics. Once folks caught wind of the concert, they flooded the bar with phone calls and the show was canceled — Gillespie says it was a big misunderstanding.

He took a similar tack this time around, posting on Millcreek’s Facebook page three days after the incident that he had no idea who the Proud Boys were when there were concerns they were inside his bar. Then he wrote that the group wasn’t actually the Proud Boys at all, but from Turning Point USA, a conservative student organization.

Philadelphia Proud Boys’ only response to The Inquirer was to say “Lol boycotting?” via email and point out that someone threw something through the Millcreek window. TPUSA’s local chapter didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Gillespie, for his part, said he acted in good faith and doesn’t know what he’d do if the Proud Boys came back. He said that he might ask them to drink somewhere else, but also that he’s “not going to discriminate” and believes in their First Amendment rights.

The Proud Boys are self-identified “Western chauvinists” and designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “general hate” group. Its male-only members have espoused anti-Muslim and misogynistic rhetoric.

Some of the group’s members have been aligned with extremists and appeared at the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., that promoted white supremacy and neo-Nazism and resulted in the death of Heather Heyer. Two of the group’s members were convicted earlier this year of attempted gang assault for taking part in a violent brawl in New York, while others reportedly made a threatening late-night visit to the Philadelphia home of a critic.

Gillespie said the bar got a phone call on Nov. 15 from someone claiming they wanted to bring in a group of Republicans to partake in karaoke. No problem, Gillespie said. He was in the bar starting at about 9:30 p.m. and saw two groups, each of about 10 people, that he didn’t recognize. They were “well-behaved,” he said, and drank, ate, and did karaoke. He noticed there was “a Proud Boy file” and “a Proud Boy logo” on one of his tables, but said he hadn’t heard of the group and thought nothing of it.

Gillespie said he went to bed around 1 a.m. and the night was without incident.

Others at the Millcreek that night remember it differently, including Vashti Bandy, a writer and liberal activist who lives in South Philly. She’s faithfully sung karaoke at Millcreek every Friday for at least six years. In 2017, Bandy gave Gillespie the benefit of the doubt and publicly defended Millcreek during the anti-Semitic-metal-band debacle.

Her loyalty was for the same reasons that made this whole incident sort of unexpected: The bar attracts a crowd that’s diverse in every way imaginable. It’s a stone’s throw from the yoga studios and vegan snack shops on Baltimore Avenue. And this is West Philly we’re talking about — Gillespie, on a radio show, called it a “bastion of liberalism,” and few would argue.

Bandy was in the bar with a group of friends and regulars when they spotted the literature. Among the materials on one table: a folder with fliers and a mouse pad that said “Philadelphia Proud Boys.” On an adjacent table were signs and stickers with TPUSA literature, including stickers and buttons with slogans like “Socialism Sucks” and “Yay for 2a,” a reference to the Second Amendment.

Patrons of the Millcreek Tavern found materials related to the Proud Boys, a far-right hate group, on tables at the bar on Nov. 15. Since then, the bar has lost regular patrons and its longtime karaoke master while groups online have flooded its reviews.

Then Bandy saw a group of about 10 white men clad in golf shirts and khaki pants. They stuck out like sore thumbs. The normal Friday-night crowd is “a mixed group,” Bandy said, “but they’re not generally the khaki-pants-golf type.”

Bandy, 40, said she then got on stage and, into the microphone while Gillespie was nearby, dedicated Lily Allen’s “F— You” to “the Proud Boys” and said something to the effect of: “We know who you are. Get out of the bar.” The group went upstairs.

Meanwhile, regular patrons alerted bar employees that there was a possible hate group in the house, and conferred with Stanley Gravitt, a karaoke administrator who’s been running the Friday-night show at Millcreek for six or seven years. Gravitt, who said he was fearful partly because he is black, said he felt unsafe and uncomfortable all night long.

And that night was only the beginning.

Gravitt, 39, said he won’t be returning. Ditto for some of the Friday-night regulars. Bandy said she can’t support a business “that at best cannot be bothered to have basic respect for regular clientele to do a minimum level of vetting to make sure you’re not bringing in hate groups.”

Online mobs on both sides flooded Millcreek’s Facebook and Yelp pages with reviews, leading to arguments in the comments. Yelp temporarily disabled posts to Millcreek’s page due to “unusual activity.”

A screenshot from Yelp showing the website suspended posts to Millcreek Tavern's Yelp page following a flood of reviews over the last couple weeks.

And a few days after the incident, Gillespie woke to find someone had thrown something heavy and metal through the front window of the bar. Police confirmed a report of vandalism was filed on Nov. 20.

Without proof, Gillespie has blamed Antifa, a loosely defined, leftist, antifascist organization that’s a frequent presence at protests in Philadelphia. Antifa has before engaged in physical confrontations with people it believes are fascists or Nazis. (SPLC says it doesn’t consider Antifa a hate group because it doesn’t “promote hatred based on race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender identity.”)

And then Gillespie stoked more outrage when he appeared a week after the incident on “The Dean Malik Show,” a local conservative talk radio program on Talk 860 WWDB-AM, and didn’t apologize or condemn the Proud Boys.

Malik defended the Proud Boys, saying organizations like the SPLC have “started supporting the cause of the progressive left.” To end the segment, he encouraged listeners to go to the Millcreek Tavern “and have a big, big, tall glass of freedom while you’re there.”

Bandy said she and her friends will be having their glasses of freedom elsewhere.

“This was not some random death metal band that no one has ever heard of,” she said. “Charlottesville made it abundantly clear to me who the Proud Boys are and what they are about.”

Anathema Volume 5 Issue 7

from Anathema

Volume 5 Issue 7 (PDF for reading 8.5×11)

Volume 5 Issue 7 (PDF for printing 11×17)

In this issue:

  • Global Insurrection
  • Pink Wave
  • What Went Down
  • Ring And The New Policing
  • Lasers!!!
  • During The Quiet
  • Sean Bonney Poem (Confessions 2)
  • Interview: 10 Years After The UC Occupations
  • Response to “Property Destruction Is Not Enough”
  • Pinkerton
  • Bomb Scares
  • End The Abatement?

Deceiving the Sky: Collective Experiments in Strategic Thinking

Submission

-book tour-

Emerging from a study group on strategy, Deceiving the Sky is a collectively produced book, resource and study guide. While the word “strategy” can evoke hierarchy, centralization and a satellite’s-eye view of the world, we feel it is necessary to strengthen our own strategic reflexes. We believe that strategy can be a lens, an orientation to the world that understands existence as a shifting array of forces, capacities and intentions. Deceiving the Sky is an attempt to build a new language that we can share, to develop our collective capacity for strategic thinking, to become more powerful together.

Dec. 4th at 7:30pm
Wooden Shoe Books
704 South St

Stevie Wilson on Organizing Abolitionist Study Group in Pennsylvania Prison

From AMW English

The following is a selection from a transcript of a podcast interview with Black and queer abolitionist writer Stevie Wilson. Stevie is being held captive by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and was recently released from solitary confinement. He speaks about the importance of abolitionist study, as a space of common encounter that undermines the hold that the carceral state has on our lives, both inside and outside prison walls.


So we know that you recently got released from, from solitary, I believe on October 17. Right?

Yeah, I got transferred from Smithfield and I’m now at SCI Fayette. Um, you know, sometimes when you’re an ally behind the walls… Sometimes means more than being an ally, being an accomplice actually. And, uh, it was a situation where a prisoner was attacked by two guards and, I kinda had an accident that we did online and the administrators found out about the accident. I was behind it and so they, uh, they moved to get me out of the way and kind of bury me in the hole. But thankfully because of the support that I had outside, it applied pressure on them and they got me out of the hole, but they transferred me to another prison. So now I’m — I was three and a half hours with my family. Now I’m six hours with my family, about 40 minutes South of Pittsburgh.

Wow. So this is basically in direct retaliation against organizing on the inside, right?

Definitely. It’s something that’s to be expected though. When you do this type of work behind the walls, it’s not about being an ally. You will become an accomplice and so whatever that person is doing they’re going to try do to you also. So I knew at one point they were trying to bury the young man in the hole because when they attack us, they try to flip it and say, you know, we attacked them. So they’ll bury them from six to nine months in the hole. And because we were successful in getting them out of the hole until a safer prison, you know, I became a target after that he was gone. And so, uh, I was able to go bother them and I did once again because of the people like Critical Resistance. I was able to come out of the hole, I did about two months battling with these people. We were able to come out of the hole and um, and, and be placed at Fayette now. So… but the work doesn’t stop. The work doesn’t stop you know?

Yeah. Do you have a sense that this is also an indirect attack on the sort of self organized abolitionist study groups inside as well?

Yeah. I think, I think…well, I’m gonna tell you something: That prison was a little different where many of the groups that we were doing were actually taking the place of programs that they had actually discontinued, right? So there was a lack of programming there. So we were putting together the transformative justice group and it was something that they liked, they gave us space for it. They gave us space for it you know, um, and what’s happening in Pennsylvania is because of the, the rehabilitation programs have been gutted. The educational programs have been gutted. There has been a space opened up for prisoners to initiate groups, right? Um, and so we did it at Smithfield, you know, and I’m here at Fayette, it’s kind of the same thing now, you know, where people don’t have anything to do when the prison wants them to do something, you know. So once again, there is an opening for us here.

So tell us a little bit more about the abolitionist study group inside that you helped run. Can you tell us more about what y’all do?

Well, the first one we called 9-9-71, obviously in reference to Attica and it was a general abolitionist study group. We started with something like “Are Prisons Obsolete?” By Angela Davis and what we do is we do a chapter reading and then we would come back and we have discussion questions. We focus a lot on definitions because this is the first time many people were hearing about abolition. You know, when you think of a world without prisons, they thought we were crazy. You know, the first thing out of their mouths, “what are we going to do with the murderers and rapists and things like that?” And so we had to really talk about basic definitions and things like safety and community and things like that. So that was the largest group because it was more generalized. We also had a group called Circle Up, which is a transformative justice group, most of those men there were under the age of 25, about 23 young men. And they were doing a program called Circle Up and it was talking about transformative justice. How we apply, inside the prison in and our families and our communities. SAS was a Queer Aboltiionist group… That group we started because it was sometimes difficult to talk about those types of issues in 9-9-71. So we had a group that went through “Captive Genders” and queer injustice and works like this from an abolitionist perspective. And then we also had book clubs… that has been taken over by Haymarket books now. So here at Fayette we are going to be doing it and Haymarket books will be providing the books for us. So we’re happy to have that program still continue.

The Local Kids – Issue 5 – Autumn 2019

Submission

Over the last decade we have been made witness to the naked brutality of power. In the four corners of the earth domination has displayed its capacity to wreck devastation without hesitation. Those who were just holding on to their last lines of dignity have been dragged down in the mud. Those who rose up to regain their dignity and fight for freedom, have been smothered and massacred. Not content with the daily administration of oppression, it seemed as if the rulers were aiming for a decisive victory by escalating their repressive violence.

They were mistaken. Instead of resignation, we are witnessing the resilience of those who want to live against all odds. The ruins that power left behind, as monuments to its scorched earth tactics and as a warning for the future, are in our hands the first stones of a new life. The cynical calculations of politicians, who are willing to sacrifice whole generations to uphold their political reign or their economical dogmas, have been erased by the unforeseen. An invisible line has been crossed; beyond this line humiliation is no longer tolerated. Where this line is drawn, and why there, is to remain unknown till it has been crossed. That there is a line is a certainty that the dominant forces wished to ignore.

Many take a passive attitude due to the unpredictable character of that moment, when the social order is not only confronted by a few rebels but by a full-on rebellion. But for anarchists the knowledge of this resilience of people should warm our hearts and nourish our determination that any instance of rebellion has the potential of overflowing.

In order to survive we all adapt to a certain extent to the daily lot of humiliations that are part of authoritarian societies. But surviving isn’t enough and another line crossed can be one too many. These lines cannot be imposed by ideology or some kind of universal truth. And in a sense they are random, but that doesn’t make them meaningless. On the contrary, they are the starting point of an existence that matters; one that rebels against its subjugation.

PDFs on thelocalkids.noblogs.org

“Power to disrupt: limits and possibilities of campus sit-ins” [Part 3 of the Campus Power Project] (JK)

from Radical Education Department

By Jason Koslowski

Introduction to the Campus Power Project

This is Part 3 of the Campus Power Project: an ongoing series of interviews, articles, and podcasts.  (For Part 1 of the Campus Power Project, click here.  For Part 2, click here)

Campus struggles in the US have surged recently: at Johns Hopkins, at Yale, at Evergreen State, at the University of Pennsylvania, and well beyond.

This series aims to help take stock of our campus struggles for radical, bottom-up, antiauthoritarian power on college campuses, so that we can make those struggles more powerful in the coming years.  The focus is on concrete organizing lessons we can learn from comrades in revolt.

The media series is only one half of the Campus Power Project.  The other half aims to help build up—across Philadelphia and beyond—lines of communication and coordination among radical campus struggles.

If you are working with leftist campus organizations and want to get involved, please reach out to us!


College campuses are systems of capitalist domination: of workers, students and surrounding communities. But campus revolts have been on the rise in recent years. In the US, for instance, as the university system comes to rely more and more on cheap, precarious labor, teacher and graduate student union struggles have been on the rise.

As public funds for colleges are slashed, tuitions increase, and campuses become key sites for fascist recruitment among disillusioned youth, many students are pushing back in occupations, walk-outs, demonstrations and other actions.

In struggles for power on-campus, the sit-in is one of the most often-used tools — although the results are mixed. Sit-ins can be powerful weapons helping shift the balance of university power for the dominated class. But they can also become sinkholes of time and energy leading to reprisals from administrators, burn-out and infighting.

Now that a new school year has begun, what lessons can we learn from recent sit-ins about how and when to use them well? And what other, and more radical, possibilities can sit-ins point us towards? To answer these questions, I look at a few recent sit-ins that happened on very different kinds of campuses. Allowing for differences, we can mine those struggles for organizing lessons.

Screen Shot 2019-05-07 at 5.34.48 PM.png

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, BALTIMORE, MD

The 35-day Hopkins sit-in that began on April 3, 2019 exploded out of a longer struggle against the administration’s push for an armed, private police force on campus. Hopkins justifies that push for the sake of both public safety and keeping up with its “urban university peers” — relying on a method that has already had deadly results across the country. In the process the school strengthens its links to Baltimore’s violently racist police force.

For about a year beforehand, the fight at Hopkins focused on contacting the JHU admins for more information and asking for a reversal of the decision. The sit-in was organized by grad and undergrad groups like Students Against Private Police and Hopkins Coalition Against ICE, with the anti-ICE coalition spearheading campus tour disruptions to affect Hopkins’ bottom line. But organizers drew on a wider base than just students, connecting, for instance, with nurses in the process of unionizing at Johns Hopkins Hospital and coordinating closely with the “the West Wednesdays” weekly demos against police violence, which began to protest the police murder of Tyrone West in Baltimore.

Originally, organizers planned a single-day occupation of the lobby of the administration building that houses the university president’s office. Once the action began, though, the occupiers decided to escalate to an indefinite occupation until administrators met their demands: disband the private police force being prepared for Hopkins; end the medical school’s training of ICE agents; and push for justice for Tyrone West.

For most of its duration the occupation was symbolic. The building functioned much as it had before: admininstrators, staff and students could freely enter and leave. Throughout, a key focus of the struggle was an aggressive media campaign against Hopkins, with organizers winning high visibility for their struggle in national media outlets like the Washington Post and the Chronicle of Higher Education. The administration, however, refused to budge on the demands. And so on May 8, the sit-in escalated. Occupiers locked the doors and shut down all access to non-protesters.

The administration’s response was swift. That night, 100 armed police forcibly evicted the handful of remaning occupiers. Protesters primarily turned to social media to attack the university while continuing support for West Wednesdays.

Despite the highly publicized eviction, the results of the sit-in have been mixed. Admins only agreed to meet after the eviction — at the end of July, when many of the students had left campus. At the meeting they agreed only to a vague campus event about the private police force and ignored calls to end ICE collaboration and disband the private police force. The meeting ended with admins announcing investigations of students and possible retaliation against occupiers.

Yet at the start of the fall term administrators folded to one key demand: the medical school announced it would not renew its contract with ICE. While the struggle is now on a weaker footing after the eviction and with impending reprisals, there is a possibility of escalation by protesters this academic year — especially if solidarity with the nurses’ unionizing efforts develops into a more coordinated and active struggle.

A Discussion on the Growth of Black & Anti-Colonial Anarchist Formations

from It’s Going Down

[Listen here]

In this episode we were lucky enough to speak with two people on the growth of Black, New Afrikan, and anti-colonial anarchist formations. One of the people joining us in the discussion is a part of the Philadelphia chapter of the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement and the other person is from the Afrofuturist Abolitionists of the Americas.

Our discussion covers a lot of ground, but we speak heavily on a workshop that the comrades are presenting across the so-called US on black anarchism, the recent theoretical Anarkata statement, as well as everything from anti-police and prison abolition organizing, to the impact of the Ferguson rebellion, survival programs, and much more.

One of the themes that came up several times, is finding “little a” anarchism or simply anarchy, in the day to day self-organization and revolt of everyday people in the face of the American plantation and finding ways to build solidarity and action with these organic forms. Our guests also stress the need for the anarchist movement to stop looking just to European groups, history, and movements for inspiration, and instead draw from the rich history of resistance to settler colonialism, slavery, and industrial capitalism in the so-called Americans, in order to better inform our organizing.

Music: Sima Lee and Black Star

For Info: Set up a workshop by getting in touch with Philly RAM here or via email (ramphilly@protonmail.com), read Anarkata statement, Black Rose reader on Black Anarchism here, and Burning Down the American Plantation from the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement here.

Reading Recommendations: 

As Black As Resistance by William C. Anderson and Zoé Samudzi

The Progressive Plantation by Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin

Anarchism and the Black Revolution by Lorenzo Kom’boa Ervin

A Soldier’s Story: Revolutionary Writings by a New Afrikan Anarchist by Kuwasi Balagoon

Burn Down the American Plantation by the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement

Black Fighting Formations by Russell Maroon Shoatz

The Dragon and the Hydra by Russell Maroon Shoatz

Anathema Volume 5 Issue 6

from Anathema

Volume 5 Issue 6 (PDF for reading 8.5×11)

Volume 5 Issue 6 (PDF for printing 11×17)

In this issue:

  • Pittsburgh Raid
  • Bernie Sanders Story
  • Chase Your Dream
  • Bring Water (Hong Kong)
  • Chile In September
  • Report Back From Canada’s Climate Strike
  • Rest In Power Kelly Gibbs
  • Vengeance For Kevin, Solidarity With Joaquin
  • ACAB Poem